The present invention generally relates to an apparatus and method for determining at least one "count" of playing cards from a set of cards which are being dealt at a table to one or more players during a game of blackjack. More specifically, the invention relates to a system for automatically counting cards, displaying the counts and verifying that the card dealt belongs to the set of cards assigned to the particular table.
Generally, blackjack is commonly played in casinos and involves a dealer and one or more players who play the cards dealt to them by the dealer against cards dealt to the dealer.
Each player draws cards from the dealer until the sum of the cards are as close to twenty-one as possible without exceeding twenty-one. If the cards dealt to any one player exceed twenty-one or the cards which are dealt to the dealer exceed twenty-one, that player or the dealer holding those cards loses.
To play blackjack, cards are dealt to each player including the dealer with most commonly one card to the dealer face down. After each player and the dealer are dealt two cards with one card facing up and the other facing down for the dealer, if the dealer has one card which is a member of a blackjack pair of cards, the face down card is privately determined by the dealer whether that card is the other member of the blackjack pair. If the two cards make up the blackjack pair for the dealer, play stops and the dealer wins.
An advantage in the game occurs in the favor of the dealer when both the player and the dealer exceed twenty-one (bust). When both the player and the dealer bust, the dealer (or house) wins. To offset this advantage somewhat, the player is given several small advantages.
For example, the player strategizes on his own, but the dealer must draw a card until the total of the cards equals seventeen or greater. In addition, the player may also double his bet and draw exactly one card in favorable situations. Furthermore, a player may split any pair of cards of equal rank and play them as two separate one-card hands. Another advantage is that a player is paid "three-to-two" when the player is dealt a blackjack and has the option to buy insurance when the dealer has an ace card face up.
The options for each player, none of which are available to the dealer, bring the percentage advantage between the player and dealer nearly to zero with perfect play. This was not recognized for many years due to the fact that a vast majority of the players have no idea regarding "proper" strategy.
In 1969, a book "Beat the Dealer" by Edward O. Thorpe was published that changed the game of blackjack dramatically. The book mathematically analyzed each possible situation and described the perfect strategy for the first time. The book offered the player a calculation for a simple "count" that would, when mastered, actually offer a player an edge of approximately one percent against the house. This advantage was, however, not constant, but fluctuating as the cards were dealt. The advantage depended on the remaining distribution of aces and face cards as compared to smaller cards.
Based on the fluctuating count, a player could determine when "good" cards remained and when the cards were in the player's favor. As a result, the advantage fluctuated between an advantage for the house to an advantage for the player. The player-counter simply determined when the cards were in his favor, and when that was the case, increased his bet.
Casinos reacted immediately by changing rules for blackjack, and business fell off as a result. The old rules were then reinstated and business returned. With the old rules, the average player continued to lose at the expected rate, but other players (card counters) seemed to win almost every play.
Casinos reacted by installing a device for dealing multiple decks called a shoe. This device was intended to make counting nearly impossible since the shoe typically holds four to eight decks. Shortly thereafter, systems began to surface for counting multi-deck games. Many counters would form teams or groups of players who would attack these games in a unique manner.
For example, a team often consisted of one "high roller" and several counters. The counters would each find a table where a dealer was shuffling and begin play. A counter would bet the minimum bet while tracking the count on the table. When the count at a particular player's table was favorable, the counter would stand up as a signal to the high roller that the odds for winning at his table were good.
The high roller would approach the table with a handful of large-valued chips. The counter, therefore, indicates to the high roller that the count is positive in the player's favor and the high roller would place large bets and typically win large sums of money from his large bets. In this way, the team players are able to "spread the bet" by placing low bets when the count was bad or while the count was being determined and by placing large bets for good or favorable counts for the player. The high roller appeared to be a superstitious gambler hopping from table to table; however, since the high roller never increased his bet, he was never suspected to be a counter or part of a counter team.
Though the signals between players of a team change, the effect of a good team remains the same--the team wins. Casinos have literally lost millions of dollars by counting teams until gaming commissions were convinced that earlier shuffling was needed. In addition, over 1100 publications exist today that educate blackjack players on various systems to beat the house, such as newsletters which detail the location, table count, number of decks in use, deck penetration and house policies for dealing with counters in casinos throughout the country.
Casinos have responded with two distinct approaches--passive and active. The passive approach involves rule changes and bet restrictions aimed at making advantages to the counter more difficult. The drawback to this approach is that changes which effect the counter also effect the average player and therefore typically cost the casino business. The active approach involves barring players that are too good to beat. The problem here is that only a counter can detect another counter. Floormen within a "pit" of blackjack tables, therefore, must be trained to count and must have the time and energy to continue this activity for an entire shift. This is not an easy task.
In addition to the other responsibilities the floorman faces, his job includes protecting the house from cheating. Typically, each floorman is responsible for watching four to six blackjack tables.
Although there are many ways the house may be cheated, the most devastating is the cold deck or "cooler". The cold deck involves several people working together and may be particularly devastating when using multiple decks. The cold deck furthermore usually involves inside help and the dealer. Normally, the scam takes place in a manner similar to the following:
A team consists generally of nine members, seven of which are at every available seat at a blackjack table. A switchman is in the last seat with four or six decks hidden in a sling under his jacket. The dealer offers a freshly shuffled pack of four or six decks to the switchman for the cut. An eighth man of the team is, for example, across the pit and starts an argument with the dealer at that table about the last hand. The floorman will respond to settle the argument, turning his back to the table where the cooler is to be placed by the switchman. The switchman thereby removes the cooler from his jacket with one hand and the decks from the table with the other. The switch is made rapidly, and the floorman is busy on the other side of the pit. At this point, the switchman leaves the casino with the only evidence, and the ninth player will take his seat so that the table again is totally occupied with team members who are implementing the scam.
The potential for loss to the casino is enormous. A four-deck shoe may be worth in the hundreds of thousands of dollars with typical betting limits. Additionally, absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing exists since the switchman is gone with the original cards from the shoe. No one knows with any certainty how often this type of scenario takes place, and the casinos are generally reluctant to publicize such occurrences. Typically a nagging suspicion is in the mind of the floorman that such has occurred, but he is often reluctant to pass that suspicion on as it only indicates that he has not properly protected his area of the casino.